 | |
|
| |
| John Cavett | |
A federal judge in Chattanooga on Wednesday rejected a plea for a lighter sentence from a young man accused of a crack cocaine crime, despite proposed legislation to do away with old sentencing rules that treat crimes involving crack much more harshly than those involving powder cocaine.
The sentencing hearing of Amar Walker in U.S. District Court on Wednesday highlighted the current national debate over the legitimacy of a 1980s-era law that sought to stamp out the ravages of crack on predominantly black inner-city neighborhoods.
It also touched on the confusion in federal courts regarding how to now punish those caught with the substance as Congress tries to resolve the issue.
"Hopefully, we'll all be relieved of this problem once Congress acts," U.S. District Judge Allan Edgar told Mr. Walker before sentencing him to three years in prison.
Authorities arrested Mr. Walker, 25, in June on a charge of possessing 13 grams of crack, a smokable form of cocaine, that was found during a routine traffic stop. Had Mr. Walker been carrying the same quantity of the powder form of the drug, under current sentencing guidelines the most time he could have received in prison was one year.
Conversely, Mr. Walker would have needed 1,300 grams of powder cocaine to receive the same three-year sentence that he received for possessing crack.
The disparity in sentencing originated in the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986, which treats every gram of crack as 100 grams of powder cocaine, based partly on its highly addictive nature and the violence that showed up in the 1980s as the result of its widespread use.
But detractors say the drug culture has changed and that the policy has fostered unintended consequences.
Retail crack dealers and low-level users such as Mr. Walker, for instance, end up receiving "longer sentences than the wholesale drug distributors who supply them the powder cocaine from which their crack is produced," a 2007 U.S. Supreme Court ruling states.
Mr. Walker's defense attorney, John Cavett, argued Wednesday in court that rules boosting the sentences for crack cocaine also unfairly target black men, who make up 85 percent of crack defendants in the federal system, records show.
He pointed to a U.S. Supreme Court precedent that, in recent years, has given federal trial judges the authority to disregard the sentencing guidelines in recognition of such unfairness.
"The invisible elephant in the courtroom," Mr. Cavett said, "is that this was, is, and always will be racist."
Records show Chattanooga federal Judge Harry S. "Sandy" Mattice has begun to sentence crack cocaine defendants as if their crimes involved powder cocaine because of the U.S. attorney general's recognition this year that the sentencing guidelines need to be fixed.
Judge Edgar, though, said he doesn't want to legislate from the bench.
"I'm not comfortable setting public policy with regard to controlled substances," he said Wednesday in court.
A DANGEROUS DRUG
Congress targeted crack cocaine for tougher prison sentences in the 1980s because:
* It was highly addictive
* Crack users and dealers were more likely to be violent
* Crack was more harmful to users
* Crack use was prevalent among teens
* Crack's low cost was making it more popular
Text Size:
This was one of Congress's few sensible legislations over the past century. Crack cocaine is extremely addictive, by far moreso than powder cocaine. The judge did the proper thing with the sentencing.